Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Results 1 - 8 of 8
Results per page:
The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 105-B, Issue 3 | Pages 269 - 276
1 Mar 2023
Tay ML Monk AP Frampton CM Hooper GJ Young SW

Aims

Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) has higher revision rates than total knee arthroplasty (TKA). As revision of UKA may be less technically demanding than revision TKA, UKA patients with poor functional outcomes may be more likely to be offered revision than TKA patients with similar outcomes. The aim of this study was to compare clinical thresholds for revisions between TKA and UKA using revision incidence and patient-reported outcomes, in a large, matched cohort at early, mid-, and late-term follow-up.

Methods

Analyses were performed on propensity score-matched patient cohorts of TKAs and UKAs (2:1) registered in the New Zealand Joint Registry between 1 January 1999 and 31 December 2019 with an Oxford Knee Score (OKS) response at six months (n, TKA: 16,774; UKA: 8,387), five years (TKA: 6,718; UKA: 3,359), or ten years (TKA: 3,486; UKA: 1,743). Associations between OKS and revision within two years following the score were examined. Thresholds were compared using receiver operating characteristic analysis. Reasons for aseptic revision were compared using cumulative incidence with competing risk.


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 104-B, Issue 6 | Pages 672 - 679
1 Jun 2022
Tay ML Young SW Frampton CM Hooper GJ

Aims

Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) has a higher risk of revision than total knee arthroplasty (TKA), particularly for younger patients. The outcome of knee arthroplasty is typically defined as implant survival or revision incidence after a defined number of years. This can be difficult for patients to conceptualize. We aimed to calculate the ‘lifetime risk’ of revision for UKA as a more meaningful estimate of risk projection over a patient’s remaining lifetime, and to compare this to TKA.

Methods

Incidence of revision and mortality for all primary UKAs performed from 1999 to 2019 (n = 13,481) was obtained from the New Zealand Joint Registry (NZJR). Lifetime risk of revision was calculated for patients and stratified by age, sex, and American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) grade.


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 104-B, Issue 2 | Pages 235 - 241
1 Feb 2022
Stone B Nugent M Young SW Frampton C Hooper GJ

Aims

The success of total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is usually measured using functional outcome scores and revision-free survivorship. However, reporting the lifetime risk of revision may be more meaningful to patients when gauging risks, especially in younger patients. We aimed to assess the lifetime risk of revision for patients in different age categories at the time of undergoing primary TKA.

Methods

The New Zealand Joint Registry database was used to obtain revision rates, mortality, and the indications for revision for all primary TKAs performed during an 18-year period between January 1999 and December 2016. Patients were stratified into age groups at the time of the initial TKA, and the lifetime risk of revision was calculated according to age, sex, and the American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) grade. The most common indications for revision were also analyzed for each age group.


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 98-B, Issue 3 | Pages 334 - 340
1 Mar 2016
Tayton ER Frampton C Hooper GJ Young SW

Aims

The aim of this study was to identify risk factors for prosthetic joint infection (PJI) following total knee arthroplasty (TKA).

Patients and Methods

The New Zealand Joint Registry database was analysed, using revision surgery for PJI at six and 12 months after surgery as primary outcome measures. Statistical associations between revision for infection, with common and definable surgical and patient factors were tested.


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 95-B, Issue 11 | Pages 1480 - 1483
1 Nov 2013
Hooper GJ Gilchrist N Maxwell R March R Heard A Frampton C

We studied the bone mineral density (BMD) and the bone mineral content (BMC) of the proximal tibia in patients with a well-functioning uncemented Oxford medial compartment arthroplasty using the Lunar iDXA bone densitometer. Our hypothesis was that there would be decreased BMD and BMC adjacent to the tibial base plate and increased BMD and BMC at the tip of the keel.

There were 79 consecutive patients (33 men, 46 women) with a mean age of 65 years (44 to 84) with a minimum two-year follow-up (mean 2.6 years (2.0 to 5.0)) after unilateral arthroplasty, who were scanned using a validated standard protocol where seven regions of interest (ROI) were examined and compared with the contralateral normal knee. All had well-functioning knees with a mean Oxford knee score of 43 (14 to 48) and mean Knee Society function score of 90 (20 to 100), showing a correlation with the increasing scores and higher BMC and BMD values in ROI 2 in the non-implanted knee relative to the implanted knee (p = 0.013 and p = 0.015, respectively).

The absolute and percentage changes in BMD and BMC were decreased in all ROIs in the implanted knee compared with the non-implanted knee, but this did not reach statistical significance. Bone loss was markedly less than reported losses with total knee replacement.

There was no significant association with side, although there was a tendency for the BMC to decrease with age in men. The BMC was less in the implanted side relative to the non-implanted side in men compared with women in ROI 2 (p = 0.027), ROI 3 (p = 0.049) and ROI 4 (p = 0.029).

The uncemented Oxford medial compartment arthroplasty appears to allow relative preservation of the BMC and BMD of the proximal tibia, suggesting that the implant acts more physiologically than total knee replacement. Peri-prosthetic bone loss is an important factor in assessing long-term implant stability and survival, and the results of this study are encouraging for the long-term outcome of this arthroplasty.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2013;95-B:1480–3.


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 95-B, Issue 2 | Pages 181 - 187
1 Feb 2013
Liddle AD Pandit H O’Brien S Doran E Penny ID Hooper GJ Burn PJ Dodd CAF Beverland DE Maxwell AR Murray DW

The Cementless Oxford Unicompartmental Knee Replacement (OUKR) was developed to address problems related to cementation, and has been demonstrated in a randomised study to have similar clinical outcomes with fewer radiolucencies than observed with the cemented device. However, before its widespread use it is necessary to clarify contraindications and assess the complications. This requires a larger study than any previously published.

We present a prospective multicentre series of 1000 cementless OUKRs in 881 patients at a minimum follow-up of one year. All patients had radiological assessment aligned to the bone–implant interfaces and clinical scores. Analysis was performed at a mean of 38.2 months (19 to 88) following surgery. A total of 17 patients died (comprising 19 knees (1.9%)), none as a result of surgery; there were no tibial or femoral loosenings. A total of 19 knees (1.9%) had significant implant-related complications or required revision. Implant survival at six years was 97.2%, and there was a partial radiolucency at the bone–implant interface in 72 knees (8.9%), with no complete radiolucencies. There was no significant increase in complication rate compared with cemented fixation (p = 0.87), and no specific contraindications to cementless fixation were identified.

Cementless OUKR appears to be safe and reproducible in patients with end-stage anteromedial osteoarthritis of the knee, with radiological evidence of improved fixation compared with previous reports using cemented fixation.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2013;95-B:181–7.


The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery British Volume
Vol. 94-B, Issue 3 | Pages 334 - 338
1 Mar 2012
Hooper GJ Maxwell AR Wilkinson B Mathew J Woodfield TBF Penny ID Burn PJ Frampton C

We carried out a prospective investigation into the radiological outcomes of uncemented Oxford medial compartment unicondylar replacement in 220 consecutive patients (231 knees) performed in a single centre with a minimum two-year follow-up. The functional outcomes using the mean Oxford knee score and the mean high-activity arthroplasty score were significantly improved over the pre-operative scores (p < 0.001). There were 196 patients with a two-year radiological examination performed under fluoroscopic guidance, aiming to provide images acceptable for analysis of the bone–implant interface. Of the six tibial zones examined on each knee on the anteroposterior radiograph, only three had a partial radiolucent line. All were in the medial aspect of the tibial base plate (zone 1) and all measured < 1 mm. All of these patients were asymptomatic. There were no radiolucent lines seen around the femoral component or on the lateral view. There was one revision for loosening at one year due to initial inadequate seating of the tibial component. These results confirm that the early uncemented Oxford medial unicompartmental compartmental knee replacements were reliable and the incidence of radiolucent lines was significantly decreased compared with the reported results of cemented versions of this implant. These independent results confirm those of the designing centre.


The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery British Volume
Vol. 92-B, Issue 4 | Pages 508 - 512
1 Apr 2010
Pearse AJ Hooper GJ Rothwell A Frampton C

We reviewed the rate of revision of unicompartmental knee replacements (UKR) from the New Zealand Joint Registry between 1999 and 2008. There were 4284 UKRs, of which 236 required revision, 205 to a total knee replacement (U2T) and 31 to a further unicompartmental knee replacement (U2U). We used these data to establish whether the survival and functional outcome for revised UKRs were comparable with those of primary total knee replacement (TKR). The rate of revision for the U2T cohort was four times higher than that for a primary TKR (1.97 vs 0.48; p < 0.05). The mean Oxford Knee Score was also significantly worse in the U2T group than that of the primary TKR group (30.02 vs 37.16; p < 0.01). The rate of revision for conversion of a failed UKR to a further UKR (U2U cohort) was 13 times higher than that for a primary TKR.

The poor outcome of a UKR converted to a primary TKR compared with a primary TKR should contra-indicate the use of a UKR as a more conservative procedure in the younger patient.